On Wednesday, January 14, 2009, at the invitation of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Also Known As Obama (hereafter known as AKA) and his sidekick, Joseph Biden, paid a visit to the United States Supreme Court, spending the better part of an hour sequestered in secrecy with eight of the nine United States Supreme Court Justices. Justice Alito was not in attendance.

According to an Associated Press release, written by Mark Sherman,

"When employees glimpsed Obama on his way out, a loud cheer went up in a building that exudes decorum."

Can one surmise the Supreme Court ecstatic over the illegitimate ...

The invitation of Chief Justice Roberts, the behind closed door meeting with a man who is the subject of lawsuits coming before the Supreme Court concerning his eligibility to the office of president, was not only inappropriate but leaves questionable the judicial conduct of the justices with whom AKA and Biden met.

Judges are to refrain from appearances of impropriety and partiality; from engaging in activities that compromise the mandate of an independent judiciary. According to the AP piece,

"Eight years ago, President George W. Bush did not visit the court before he took office, but the circumstances were  to put it mildly  unusual.

In December 2000, the court decided the case of Bush v. Gore by a 5-4 vote, ending the legal battle over the contested Florida election and effectively sealing the presidency for Bush."

The circumstances surrounding AKA are just as "unusual", considering the question of eligibility because of his refusal to produce the one document that would prove (or disprove) his eligibility to the office of president  his long form vault copy Hawaii birth certificate  a document that ....

This is what ethics is all about. Just the appearance of Obama and the Justices amounts to the same thing as committing an act of unethical behavior. How can we believe a President and Justices who do this? Especially when the Justices are denying without comment every case which I consider based on a legitimate question (Is Mr. Obama eligible to run for the POTUS).

It’s a great article, although Lynn Stuter might want to be sure that her affairs are in order, as she’ll be one of the first to be rounded up and shipped off to whatever gulag opens up in her region of the USSPR (United States Socialist Peoples Republic).

The invitation of Chief Justice Roberts, the behind closed door meeting with a man who is the subject of lawsuits coming before the Supreme Court concerning his eligibility to the office of president, was not only inappropriate but leaves questionable the judicial conduct of the justices with whom AKA and Biden met.

[snip]

At this point, it should be very obvious to the American people, no matter their party affiliation, that the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the United States government no longer consider themselves the servant of the people, but their master.

Orly had to explain to Mr. Bickell when he called her how we citizens got concerned when we saw the information about the cases we have all supported, worked on, and followed disappear from the docket.

Orly also had to explain to Mr. Bickell that many of us citizens are also concerned about the 8 out of 9 justices meeting privately with Mr. Obama. No reporters were allowed. No attorneys were invited on behalf of the Plaintiffs. This causes many of us citizens to question the rules of judicial ethics and causes us to question the impartiality on behalf of the justices.
Quite a number of people have contacted their senators and congressmen because of this meeting and want the justices impeached because the plaintiffs and attorneys weren’t present.

Well .. what if the Chief Justice realized that taking the case before a court where the media would be listening might prove uncomfortable for the country and cause a Constitutional crisis.

What if the Chief Justice told the new President - either produce a birth certificate or you’re out of office.

Wouldn’t anybody want to avoid a Constitutional crisis - especially since 95% of all the blacks in this country would tear it apart if they thought for one moment - the white man - took away their black president.

I just wish a little more common sense would prevail in the world .. it would save a lot of hyperventilating.

20
posted on 01/22/2009 10:02:59 PM PST
by The Final Harvest
(Michael Yon: "The U.S. military is the most respected institution in Iraq.")

"Wouldnt anybody want to "avoid a Constitutional crisis - especially since 95% of all the blacks in this country would tear it apart if they thought for one moment - the white man - took away their black president."

One, I don't buy that "Blacks" are going to rip the country apart, most are law abiding citizens. To think otherwise is racist.

Two, you don't run a Country by a few peoples self appointed "common sense"..that's called a dictatorship.

Three...if a crisis were to arise, the fault would not be on the citizens who raised questions but on the person who perpetrated the secrecy that gave rise to the questions.

Not only would there be massive protest and rioting no doubt...by white and blacks who view this as conservatives overturning and election...the GOP and conservatives would be finished for a generation...I’m not worried because the Supreme court will not play politics with this issue.

Those of you who righteously talk about the constitution are fooling yourselves...it’s not about the constitution. Overturning an election would be unconstitutional. It’s about a refusal to accept the election results. Our guy lost period. Better luck in four years. If the court did what you want...ruled on natural born and then retroactively applied it to the 2008 election...now that would be unconstitutional and would destroy our election process.

“its not about the constitution. Overturning an election would be unconstitutional. “

You seem to worry about what is constitutional where you like rather than with respect to actuality. Overturning an election is a duty to the Constitution if the election itself is Constitutionally flawed.

Moving constitutional issues aside in the Obama case; Obama has a duty to the country and those who voted for him, not to mention to himself and his agenda, to end the question of his birth and show the document being so speculated about. It is the adult thing to do. It is the American thing to do. It is the RESPONSABLE thing to do.

The skinny in DC is that Barry’s Real Immigration status is going to be covered up. Official and unofficial DC considers having an unconstitutional President LESS dangerous than the civil unrest throwing his worthless ass out on to the curb where it belongs.

The invitation of Chief Justice Roberts, the behind closed door meeting with a man who is the subject of lawsuits coming before the Supreme Court concerning his eligibility to the office of president, was not only inappropriate but leaves questionable the judicial conduct of the justices with whom AKA and Biden met.

ex parte communication in an ongoing case is something no judge should allow.

32
posted on 01/23/2009 8:02:44 AM PST
by Polarik
("A forgery created to prove a claim repudiates that claim")

At this point, if some states do manage to get laws in place to require the long form certificate to be shown before being on the next election ballot, I suspect enough colusion that a really good forgery will be positioned in Hawaii. It's hard to imagine why it hasn't already happened, unless

1. This issue is being used to controll and manipulate our new president, and giving him a good forgery would free him to do whatever he wants

or 2. Fear that there is real evidence that he was born overseas and noone wants to risk tampering with the "vault" copies and being hung out to dry

Fear that there is real evidence that he was born overseas and noone wants to risk tampering with the "vault" copies and being hung out to dry

Hawaii officials are guaring the vault BC as if it were the Shroud of Turin The BC is the property of Hawaii, not Obama, so there would have to be collusion with high-level officials to pull a smash and grab.

Obama knows for a fact that he cannot get his grubby little hands on it, and even if he could, its non-authenticity would be a lot easier to spot as a forgery than the image was.

34
posted on 01/23/2009 8:47:08 AM PST
by Polarik
("A forgery created to prove a claim repudiates that claim")

It’s all plausible. What’s more, is anyone in Hawaii in 1961 could have registered a birth. Regardless of where the baby was actually born, he could easily have been born in Kenya and brought to Hawaii and then registered as having been born at a STREET ADDRESS as opposed to a hospital. He would then have a Hawaii Certificate of birth, but still have been born in Kenya. All it would take would be for his mom and a witness to lie. No one would have asked for any proof whats so ever. If there are real records in Kenya, thats relevant! If there are real records of Indonesian citizenship, THAT is relevant. His Immigration status is RELEVANT because if he held citizenship of ANY other country, Britain, Kenya, Indonesia, BY LAW can NOT be a Natural Born Citizen. He is a naturalized Citizen.

It was a fraudulent election. There is nothing retroactive. We have someone who refuses to prove he is eligble, who raised hundreds of millions from unknown and possibly offshore sources, who has already signed orders that could benefit Islamic terrorists. A polling firm showed terrorism is #3 out of 15 things important to Americans. Faux global warming was last.

If SCOTUS and other courts keep “dissing” the citizenry then the next case should be filed by thousands of military members - retired, active and reserve.

Let the SCOTUS and other courts tell men and women who risk their lives and who take an oath to protect the Constitution that they have NO standing.

The project appears to be already happening with preliminary efforts through the VFW and other veterans groups.

My hope for SCOTUS to do the right thing and hear the cases is dwindling fast. Many think they are waiting for the right case to present itself so there will be no doubt that the full truth will come out.

Wish I could say that I still have great hope in SCOTUS. I still can not imagine Justice Thomas, Alito, Scalia and Roberts letting this issue go unanswered. If Monday brings no comments from SCOTUS on the Orley case, I will know they are turning their backs on our Constitution.

Think of it from a criminal case perspective. Years ago, say a law was passed that nobody ever broke. Nobody even got around to deciding whose job it was to enforce the law. Then finally somebody breaks the law. In a criminal case, while yes, it is the law, few judges are going to convict, or even try, somebody for breaking it, if nobody even has been determined to be in charge of enforcing the law.

But all hope is not lost. While Obama is going to get over—once—at some point the Supreme Court is going to tell congress that they had better legislatively pass an exception, or there is no way in hell they will let Obama run for re-election, if it comes to that. With a congressional exception that they declare him to be naturally born American, no problem.

More importantly, the SCOTUS will give fair warning to the political parties that they had better vet the heck out of future candidates so this doesn’t happen again. That’s what they are doing right now—crossing the t’s and dotting the i’s.

Yes, this time, the courts let the bank robber walk because of a loophole in the law. But don’t do it again, or else.

It was a fraudulent election. There is nothing retroactive. We have someone who refuses to prove he is eligble, who raised hundreds of millions from unknown and possibly offshore sources, who has already signed orders that could benefit Islamic terrorists.

Right. It must be emphasized that John Jay's intent about this is not about presidential elections, per se. It is about making sure that anyone who serves as Commander in Chief is a natural born Citizen and without foreign allegiance.

Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.

The invitation of Chief Justice Roberts, the behind closed door meeting with a man who is the subject of lawsuits coming before the Supreme Court concerning his eligibility to the office of president, was not only inappropriate but leaves questionable the judicial conduct of the justices with whom AKA and Biden met.

Has everybody forgotten the time that Scalia and Cheney went hunting while the Supreme Court was deliberating a case against Cheney? What is illegal is for a judge to talk to a party about the case.

Seeing as-- unlike Bush v. Gore-- the Supreme Court has not agreed to hear any case against Obama, I'm sure whatever Obama and the Justices talked about, it wasn't the cases against Obama.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.